Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Observations of bullet performance

There have been a couple of threads here lately where commonly used bullets that are generally accepted to be good performers, haven't expanded as expected.

I am just wondering if the loads used may have been the issue?

Where I shoot at the range I am usually the only person using a chronograph and as such get really often asked to check loads by people.

Almost without exception they are at least a couple of hundred fps short of what the owners were expecting, and of course me and my gear are always to blame.

When I first started graphing book loads - 1981 - it was uncommon for my loads and or my guns to give the expected (listed) velocities.

Over the years I've noticed improvement in the accuracy of book listed velocities. All of them are not as expected but MORE are at least closer.

We must remember that none of us are using the same...
Rifles/Barrels
Brass
Primers
Powder
Bullets - that are used by the loading manuals.

Some or Many don't notice that some pressures are listed - CUP - not PSI.

They're not the same and 'usually' velocity will be less because the CUP pressures are lower than PSI.

Jerry

Castle Rock,

I had the same experience a number of times after buying my first chronograph. They were very rare back then, and every guy who asked me to check the velocity of their loads was disappointed (and as you noted, often somewhat angry). But I doubt the loads used were the issue, or are today.

Instead the problem is a common condition called Velocity Optimism. Those who refuse to spend a hundred bucks on a basic chronograph instead check several sources of data for their approximate load, then pick the source listing the highest muzzle velocity--even if the data used a different bullet make, primer or barrel length than they're using. All they care about is whether the powder and bullet weight are the same.

This method of velocity estimating is bound to fail, because test barrels that provide the highest velocity normally do so because the chambers and bores are usually tighter than the average factory rifle, so tend to provide higher velocities for the same charge.

Some companies use test barrels for determining pressures, then chronograph the loads in what they sometimes call "typical" factory rifles. But there is no such thing, since factory chambers and barrels vary from pretty tight to very loose. But Velocity Optimists, by definition, don't pick speeds from loose-barreled factory rifles.

Yep funny how it is our fault that their loads are a bit anaemic.

I generally use light for calibre good quality bullets, for example in my 260 AI 100 grain Ballistic Tips or TTSX and the performance is consistently good and repeatable on pigs and deer.
I have no need to use low wind drift bullets because everything around here seems to be shot at 100 to 300 yards

"There have been a couple of threads here lately where commonly used bullets that are generally accepted to be good performers, haven't expanded as expected.

I am just wondering if the loads used may have been the issue?"

I agree that most reloads do not match advertised manual velocities, but I doubt that a few hundred fps is seriously detrimental to a bullet's performance unless your are already on the low or high end of the scale

Saddlesore, I was always under the impression that a few hundred fps can make all the difference in how, certain bullets in particular, perform on game. I started out using Hornady interloks- which I think are decidedly unfickle. I used a few Noslers but now use mostly Sierra's. Seeing as they have a rep for being fragile - and given most my shots will be inside 200 yds, I load accordingly. Meaning on the lighter side. I have had discussions with others I trust who find accuracy comes in, goes out, and returns, as you step up the charge ladder. I can almost always find more than one load with a single powder that works. a low load and a high load if you will. I just use the lower one of those.

Not sure how many might agree with this notion. Most seem bent on max velocities and I understand the need many have for this. I do wonder sometimes how many reloaders feel cheated if their best load isn't at max velocitiy?

As an example. Sierra Game kings work well in the 2000 -2800fps range, but tend to come apart at 3000+ fps.However you get fairly good expansion and terminal performance on game in those ranges. It took a lot of convincing for people to realize that a Sierra Game King is not a 3000 fps bullet and a lot of folks still use the bullet at those velocities.
Notice I did say " unless you are at the high or low end of the scale.

Hunting bullets are designed to usually work in a fairly wide range of velocities.If they were not, you would be selecting a different bullet for every different range you intended to hunt.Hence,my conclusion.

Of course you can't use bullets designed for a 3 0-30, for example, in a 3000fps chambering and we have to be somewhat diligent in selecting a bullet for the distance, game, and velocity we intend to use for.

Velocity will indeed effect accuracy and I have found a grain or two under a max load usually yields the best accuracy in my rifles and magnums that I have owned usually performed best at max or near max loads.

As I interpreted it,the OP was referring to some of these mono bullets like Barnes where more than a few users have complained that their chosen bullets had note expanded as advertised . My belief is that there are enough of these complaints that it can't be attributed to a lower than expected velocity compared to book values. If a Barnes bullet, for example, works at 3000fps, and your rifle yields 2800 fps velocity with a load that a manual advertised 3000 fps,it should still work. Obviously from the number of complaints, that isn't always true.

If your loads chronographed at 2500 fps and the book says they should be 3000fps, there is more of a problem thanjust book to actual velocities

7mm Mashburn.
168g Berger hunting bullet.
Freezer doe at 200 yards.
I hit her about 5 inches farther back than i wanted.
Thats on me.
Doe went down at the shot.
On the off side its stomach was totally outside of the deers body.
About a 7 inch exit hole.
Stomach wasnt broken.
I pushed it back through the hole and gutted like normal.
Exploding bullets work well in the chest cavity.
Not so much farther back.
dave

I'm a fellow who likes to muck around with the easiest, simplest, cheapest solution I can find in my reloading. As a result, most of my favorite loads are a few percentage points off the MAX. I take sure-bet shots at whitetails at fairly close ranges, and usually the biggest challenge I look for is how close I can run the pickup truck to the carcass. As a result, I am not an expert on bullet failure.

I am also not a big expert on bullet success. I have recovered exactly 1 bullet in 15 years. It was a pure-lead .54 cal muzzleloader bullet recovered out of a doe. It had flattened to a pancake under the far hide. Hunting success? Plenty. Bullet success? Frankly, I am at a loss.

However, I will throw my $.02 in on this subject regarding one narrow point. It has been my experience on a few occasions that the first shot does not always bring them to a proper toes-up configuration. I've never recovered a bullet in these situations, but I have noticed that sometimes even the best shot at an optimally situated animal can produce absolutely nothing.

"Ah HA!" you say. "Shaman, if only you'd loaded for better velocity. You would not have had to take that second shot."

I say piffle! If I'm shooting my 308 WIN 165 grain load and it hits a deer at 2600 instead of 2700 fps inside 100 yards, that is no different than the target being 50 yards further out. Furthermore, if I'd taken that shot with a 300 Savage instead of a 308 WIN, I'd be told it was perfectly adequate. Still, the deer paid no attention and went back to munching grass.

Now, here's the odd part. Over the years, I've discovered that it is ill advised to try to go back through the same hole. Once you've plowed that furrow, you're basically sending a bullet through open air. On the other hand, re-targeting an inch or two away inevitably puts them down. I've seen this happen on a 30-30 WIN, a 35 Whelen, a 30-06 and a 308 WIN. All shots were inside 100 yards. All first shots were well placed broadside or slight quartering shots aimed to take out both lungs and the top of the heart. No bullets were ever recovered and the far side of the animal inevitably showed signs of proper expansion.

My reason for bringing this up is that, given any reasonable bullet in any reasonable situation, you're going to have days where stuff just happens. If I've sent a round through the heart and lungs and nothing happens, I don't suspect the bullet. On the other hand, I do suspect that under the right conditions whitetails can have absolutely devastating damage done in the boiler room and show no outward effect.

Without a carcass to examine, there is no valid point that can be made for bullet failure. Even with a carcass, without the bullet to examine, there is no bullet failure. However, the fact that you have the carcass negates the argument of bullet failure.

shaman,

Yeah, you can come to some conclusions about bullet performance even if the bullet isn't recovered in the animal. In particular a small hole, with almost no peripheral tissue damage, indicates the bullet didn't expand much if at all.

But that's far rarer than most people think, and is not usually due to lower velocity except at very long ranges. Most expanding bullet open fine as long as the impact velocity is anywhere close to 2000 fps, and softpoint or plastic-tip bullets will open down to 1600-1800 fps, depending on the design.

Bullet rotation has an effect as well. That's slower at reduced muzzle velocities, but again, at ranges out to 200 yards (where 90% of big game is taken) a muzzle velocity 100-200 fps slower isn't going to have any meaningful effect.

My experience is that Sierra Game King will not hold up at 2700 if the bullet hits solid material in 30 caliber. However, I have little experience with Sierra bullets in other calibers on game animals. I've wondered about the 300 grain 375 bullets that some have promoted.

2500 fps vs 2700 fps with many bullets should not make much difference. I'd worry about a higher velocity with fragile bullets. Plus I've read (but not experienced) about poor bullet performance on monolithic bullets at lower velocities.

Each bullet has a window where it's performance shines, IMO. Some bullets have a wide window (such as partitions and similar bullets), others -- too high a velocity or too low may cause poor performance. At least that's my point of view.

I could not agree more. However, I'd say that if one is able to measure the bullet hole, then the bullet did its part.

Case in point: Last weekend's groundhog succumbed to a 117 grain Hornady Interlock SPBT at 100 yards traveling about 2900 fps at the muzzle of a 25-06 It had a hole going in, and a hole going out, but it appeared the groundhog just didn't have enough there to impinge on the bullet. Bullet failure? I'd say not. Was the bullet the best choice? No, but it got the job done.

Case #2: 165 grain Hornady Interlock fired at 150 yards from a 30-06 at a coyote. .30-ish hole in the brisket and a dime-sized hole out the back. Bullet failure? No. Best choice on a coyote? No.

Case #3: 165 grain Hornady Interlock fired at 20 yards from an M1 Garand at a small buck. First round did absolutely nothing. My son, young Mooseboy, was advised to aim an inch rearward and send another round downrange. This one caused an explosion the bottom seam opened up and the animal spilled the contents of its abdominal cavity on the ground. Deer ran 60 yards before tripping over its innards and piling up. Bullet failure? I found neither bullet. Baseball sized hole in the ribs on the far side.

Mind you, this is just a down and dirty whitetail hunter talking. Folks on this august forum have called me a booger eating moron for using a 30-06.

Funny thing is I always get more velocity out of my 220 Swift than the book says, but only get two reloads out of my brass, can't figure it out.

The flip side, is that a controlled expansion bullet wouldn't have dropped the deer.

Mostly detrimental to egos.

Simple solution!

Tell all those Dickheads to go buy their own chronograph!!

Some people are stringent idealists where a 100% successful hunt/carcass at there feet is not enough,
they also want the spent projectile looked identical the one in the carefully crafted product advertisement.
..

You are not serious ?


Jerry

shaman,

One of the animals I've shot where the bullet apparently didn't open was a big mule deer, standing broadside on the edge of a 15-foot rimrock with 3-4 does and fawns. I was on top of the plateau just about 100 yards from the deer, and at the shot the buck turned and disappeared over the rimrock. My shooting position wasn't the steadiest, but the crosshairs had looked to be on the buck's shoulder when the rifle went bang.

I walked over there, and below the rimrock was at least 250 yards of cured fall grassland, ending in ponderosa pine timber. I expected to see the dead buck somewhere in the open grass, but didn't, so looked around for some sign of a hit. Couldn't find any until I got down on my hands and knees, eventually locating one drop of bright red blood about the size of a wooden match-head. And that was it.

It took a while to find a way down the rimrock, and a search of the hard dry ground along the base found a bunch of partial deer tracks but nothing sufficient to be identified as the buck's. Didn't find any more blood, so started working back and forth in a fan pattern from the spot where he'd jumped down. In places the grass was somewhat taller than it looked from above, so it took a while. Luckily the shot had been taken late in the morning so there was plenty of daylight.

After 45 minutes (which seemed longer) I still hadn't found any trace of blood or even a track to follow. Was skirting the edge of some taller grass when I noticed an odd branch rising out of the grass. When I walked over to investigate it turned out to be the dead buck, with the side that had been facing me on top.

There wasn't a drop of blood around, and in fact I couldn't see any entrance hole, but found it during field-dressing: The bullet had entered the muscle at the rear of the shoulder, gone through both lungs, and exited the far ribs, but the hole through the ribs was tiny, with the bruised tissue around it in the lungs no larger in diameter than a quarter, and mostly smaller. The exit hole was almost as small as the entrance. The buck had traveled at least 200 yards after being shot through both lungs, and the only blood found along his path was that tiny drop on top of the rim.

Had something similar happen with a pronghorn buck about 20 years later, the range about 250 yards. In that instance the buck went at least 250 yards, and only started leaving blood on the ground about eight feet from where he died.

In both instances the rifle was a .257, on the mule deer a Roberts and on the pronghorn a Weatherby. (The bullet used in the Roberts is no longer made, but the one used in the Weatherby is.) Luckily the country was wide-open, and both bucks were eventually found, though both should have been dead within 30 yards. Or at least that's my experience on quite a few other mule deer and antelope killed with both rounds, since 30 yards far as any of them traveled after being hit broadside through the center of both lungs.

I would not, however, have liked to try to find a whitetail buck killed in the same fashion in typical Montana riverbottom brush, or in some of the thickets in our western mountains, or in many other places I've hunted whitetails in several other states. Yeah, I could "measure" the bullet hole, but it was tiny and didn't leak much blood at all, despite a wound channel through both lungs and an exit. So no, I don't think the bullet did its part in either instance. Which is why I never shot another animal with either one.

Not just 2800fps, if Barnes quotes a minimum expansion velocity like 1800fps, the user should be reasonably entitled to expect
the bullet to work as designed (expand in some reasonable way relative to impact velocity).

M D -

One problem I have seen in trying to measure bullet holes in hides is the

elasticity of hides. They do expand and contract IMO.

Jerry

Yes, they do. But the exit hole from a .25 caliber expanding bullet should be larger than a knitting needle.

M D -

Yes indeed. The only exit holes I've seen that were small like that, I could tell the bullet had Xploded and only fragments exited.

Jerry

[quote=shaman]I'm a fellow who likes to muck around with the easiest, simplest, cheapest solution I can find in my reloading. As a result, most of my favorite loads are a few percentage points off the MAX. I take sure-bet shots at whitetails at fairly close ranges, and usually the biggest challenge I look for is how close I can run the pickup truck to the carcass. As a result, I am not an expert on bullet failure.

I am also not a big expert on bullet success. I have recovered exactly 1 bullet in 15 years. It was a pure-lead .54 cal muzzleloader bullet recovered out of a doe. It had flattened to a pancake under the far hide. Hunting success? Plenty. Bullet success? Frankly, I am at a loss.

However, I will throw my $.02 in on this subject regarding one narrow point. It has been my experience on a few occasions that the first shot does not always bring them to a proper toes-up configuration. I've never recovered a bullet in these situations, [/color]but I have noticed that sometimes even the best shot at an optimally situated animal can produce absolutely nothing.

"Ah HA!" you say. "Shaman, if only you'd loaded for better velocity. You would not have had to take that second shot."

I say piffle! If I'm shooting my 308 WIN 165 grain load and it hits a deer at 2600 instead of 2700 fps inside 100 yards, that is no different than the target being 50 yards further out. Furthermore, if I'd taken that shot with a 300 Savage instead of a 308 WIN, I'd be told it was perfectly adequate. Still, the deer paid no attention and went back to munching grass.

Now, here's the odd part. Over the years, I've discovered that it is ill advised to try to go back through the same hole. Once you've plowed that furrow, you're basically sending a bullet through open air. On the other hand, re-targeting an inch or two away inevitably puts them down. I've seen this happen on a 30-30 WIN, a 35 Whelen, a 30-06 and a 308 WIN. All shots were inside 100 yards. All first shots were well placed broadside or slight quartering shots aimed to take out both lungs and the top of the heart. No bullets were ever recovered and the far side of the animal inevitably showed signs of proper expansion.

My reason for bringing this up is that, given any reasonable bullet in any reasonable situation, you're going to have days where stuff just happens. If I've sent a round through the heart and lungs and nothing happens, I don't suspect the bullet. On the other hand, I do suspect that under the right conditions whitetails can have absolutely devastating damage done in the boiler room and show no outward effect.

Without a carcass to examine, there is no valid point that can be made for bullet failure. Even with a carcass, without the bullet to examine, there is no bullet failure. However, the fact that you have the carcass negates the argument of bullet failure.

Shaman,

This post of yours does not make sense:

However, I will throw my $.02 in on this subject regarding one narrow point. It has been my experience on a few occasions that the first shot does not always bring them to a proper toes-up configuration. I've never recovered a bullet in these situations,[color:#FF0000] but I have noticed that sometimes even the best shot at an optimally situated animal can produce absolutely nothing.[color:#FF0000][/color]

The best, first shot on an animal can produce nothing???

Wrong!!

First off, let me address the story of M. Mule Deer.

The key portion of your stories is the small bullet holes on the other side. I would indeed agree that the bullets did not expand the way you expected. The point of there being no blood trail is extraneous.

One of the questions I used to field was "What round produces the best blood trail?" Blood trails are more a function of where the entrance and exit wounds occur on the animal. The size of the hole is a secondary matter. The chest cavity is like a bucket. If you shoot a hole in it, blood will leak out when the blood reaches the hole. If the hole is high, a lot of blood has to fill the bucket before it starts leaking. I've had a .308 blow a hole the size of a tennis ball on the far side and seen zero blood for the first 80 yards. In this case, in this case, both entrance and exit wounds were high. On the other hand, I have seen a buck with a quarter-sized hole leave a gusher, because I'd shot him from a high angle in a treestand.

Your two examples are good ones. However, I'd just throw out that a failure to open that was endemic to a particular bullet would be hard to hide in this modern world of the Internet and customer reviews.

Now to M. Savage 99's comment:

Look, it's really easy to blame the indian in a situation like this. However, I'd say maybe 1 in 10 whitetails we shoot here at camp have some anomalous behavior after the shot. The first shot is a good boiler room shot, and either there is zero reaction, or the deer runs off a bit and then resumes feeding, or stands there defiantly like this story from 2005.

Hubert D. Buck meets Mr. Whelen

If memory serves, the exit wound was one ragged hole. After that episode, I switched from Remington PSPCL to the round nosed SPCL's. I have no idea if it was the bullet's fault, but I was determined to blame the mess on something.

My last instance with this was 2010. I shot the buck with a 165 grain Hornady Interlock SP fired from my Savage 99 in 308 WIN. The first shot was about 100 yards broadside. The finishing shot was under 70 yards slightly quartering away. The entrance and exit holes were touching. Heart and lungs were destroyed, so it was hard to tell which shot had done what.

The shaman Bags an 8 pointer

I've used this bullet to take a large percentage of the whitetails at our camp since 2001. I have the utmost confidence in the Hornady 165, both SP and SPBT. I'd be the first to admit stuff does happen every now and again.

shaman,

I can assure you that I'm familiar with how high a bullet exits on the side of an animal affecting the size of the blood trail. In both the instances I mentioned, the hole was about a third of the way up from the bottom of the chest. Not only were both entrance and exit holes tiny, but the narrow wound channel didn't result in much interior damage. The vast majority of the blood remained inside the undamaged portions of the lungs, which were considerable.

Bullets that fail to open are certainly rarer than bullets that fail to penetrate, but the make of bullet that failed to open on the pronghorn buck is actually pretty popular, even though failures to open have been documented by quite a few hunters. Sometimes the bullet is even recovered, normally through a severely angling shot on a larger animal, providing further proof of the problem. But this normally occurs within a fairly narrow range of bullet weights and diameters, one reason many hunters never encounter the problem when using this particular bullet.

The other problem is that most bullets even in that narrow "problem range" expand fine. Between those two factors, most hunters will never encounter a bullet that doesn't open, because most hunters don't see many animals killed. But when it does happen problems can definitely occur. One of my good friends once had two of that brand of bullet fail to open during a safari in Africa, resulting in very long chases. Luckily, both animals were recovered--and both bullets were recovered. One had barely started to open, but the front end never expanded even to full bullet diameter. The other didn't open at all.

This statement from Shaman above is unbelievable. I post it and then laugh.

"The first shot is a good boiler room shot, and either there is zero reaction, or the deer runs off a bit and then resumes feeding, or stands there defiantly like this story from 2005."

Look, Mister Savage, I'm not trying to blow smoke up your skirt. If it was my failure or the equipment's, I'd be the first to say so. My point in bringing this up is to illustrate that deer hunting is not as sure a thing as some folks want to believe. At least it has not been so for me, and I have heard enough reports from others that I am inclined to believe this to be so. Sometimes the root cause of the failure remains a mystery.

You can laugh all you want. If you have not seen a deer react this way to a shot, then so be it. There is no reason for you to be derisive, just because of your lack of experience in this regard. The worse instance I've ever seen was a 60lb doe go back to browsing with a long arterial spurter coming from her side. My point in bringing this up is that sometimes even the deer's reaction may not be indicative of bullet performance.

My apologies to Mister Mule Deer. I looked back on my previous post and realized it did not come out quite right. My point was not to say you did not realize the height of the impact influencing the size of the blood trail. What I meant to communicate was that folks in general seem to equate bullet performance with the size of the blood trail.

Shaman -

I have seen deer have all kinds of reactions to being hit. Drop Right There, Kick like a mule, rear up, stagger sideways, walk STIFF legged a few steps, et.al. including NO reaction at all for a little bit of time.

Remember the member who wears the DUNCE cap. Indications are that some folks haven't shot/killed many deer.

Jerry

http://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/10017794/1


dave

Thanks.

I spent some years as a QA Manager. In Quality Assurance you are constantly faced with anecdotal problems.

What impresses me in this thread is nearly every situation is unique. Every failure ends up being a one-off. Furthermore, one of the key factors, speed, is related to a factor that hunters are historically inaccurate in estimating: distance. I can't count the number of times I've heard somebody claim to have nailed a buck at 300 yards with a 30-30 offhand.

Do some of these bullet failures come from inadequate muzzle velocity? I'd say you'd have to rule out faulty distance estimation first.

On the other hand. . .

I worked in a solder factory for about a decade. A lot of the issues encountered there would be similar to bullet production. What I can tell you from that experience is the finished product can have a wide variation in its properties depending on how the material was handled. We'd make a batch of brazing rod, and if things were not done just right, a semi-ductile rod of alloy could come out so brittle it would shatter when dropped to the floor. We were known for our high quality, but I'll tell you that keeping the product in spec was a bear, and we were selling it by the 10s of thousands of pounds. I did not work in QA at that plant, but I respected QA's work.

Based on that experience, it would not surprise me if one welding stick in a thousand came out queer in some manner, just as I would not be surprised if 1 bullet per million or even 1 bullet in 10 thousand came out bad. QA can catch a bad batch, but failure rates that low are going to be hard to spot.

I am leaving now for a couple days' sabbatical to test whether a .54 caliber dead-soft lead bullet cast on my own patio is sufficient to put down a KY whitetail. It may be while before I get back here.

Think the last deer he killed was in the late 1950's.

Bill Steigers at Bitterroot use dot tell me that he routinely rejected its of copper and lead for jackets and cores because they did not meet his specifications. He said that "good" copper and lead were essential to uniform penetration and expansion . It was important that the material be ductile enough and not brittle, which was inclined to shatter.

Im convinced that this is one reason for the bullet's reputation for uniform expansion and performance,which is strikingly similar in all calibers from 270 to 375. Still I bet a few got by his scrutiny even though I have never seen one.

I do know that he refused offers to go large scale "commercial" with the Bitterroot with other bullet companies because the techniques required to manufacture the bullets would have necessitated the use of brittle alloys for jackets and cores and compromised the bullet. He was not willing to do that.

I would not be shocked to learn that substandard material accounts for some of the bullet bahviour people complain about.

More than a few Barnes 'failures' I believe can also be traced to twist rate.

Lots of folks are afraid of twist, for some odd reason.

A man would have to work hard to push/spin a Barnes too fast. As much as velocity is your friend with a Barnes (especially the pre-TTSX), spinning the hell out of them is a huge plus.

Some very good points in all of this.

Here are a few samples of my own: Case 1 - groundhog hunting with my .223 Rem. Had been using HP's all along of 53gr with great success to around 300 yds. Was getting low on them, so decided (?) to switch to the Nos. 53gr SBBT. Shot an 8 lb in the chest as it faced me at about 50 yds. It dropped so fast in the 1-foot tall grass that I temporarily lost sight of it. Walking in the directing of where I'd aimed, it was found stone-cold-dead still facing in the same direction as when shot. No blood, no apparent entrance (at first glance) and no exit. The bullet entrance was discovered, after a prolonged search, and not a single drop of blood anywhere. NO EXIT! When I picked up the little beastie, it was as though it was filled with water! That discouraged me from ever using that bullet on anything larger.

As a complete contrast to the above, I, at one time previously, had shot many groundhogs with a .22WM at up to 150 yds. The HP 40s would blow a hole through 'em that you could just about see daylight on the far side. In fact, the first one shot with my .22 WM was in a hedgerow at about 10 yards, and I literally was able to stick the toe of my boot into the cavity!

Case 2 - I shot a good medium-class bl. bear frontally in the chest from 70 yds in a treestand using a single-shot NEF .45-70. The result was similar to the groundhog episode. The load was a 465gr semi-hardcast at 1900 fps (MOA and chronographed). The rifle weighed less than 8 lbs with scope and ammo attached, so recoil was "up there" and when the rifle came down out of recoil the bear had "disappeared". Well, actually the grass was 30-inches tall and he was simply "flattened" without a wiggle in the tall grass. I got down on the ground, walked over to where he should be -- he was flat on his chest as though sleeping and not a drop of blood anywhere. I found the bullet entrance where it should be and, later, in dressing him out found the exit at the bottom of his sternum. His chest was filled with blood and not a drop on the ground. A neighbor, digging a water hole for his cattle, heard the "Waaack" of the bullet and said out loud to himself, "Either he hit a large tree or the bear".

Case 3, 4, 5 etc. I'll reserve those for another time.

If you do much hunting over time (In my case that's 60+ years) you're bound to have some anomalies. But I will say this about the unnamed bullet made reference to by MD -- my experience exactly!

Bob

www.bigbores.ca

Mule Deer, I think I used the same bullet that you used in the Roberts on a Virginia whitetail, with similar performance. I shot the animal twice through the lungs, and the wound channel from those never got larger in diameter than a nickel, the deer ran about 40 yards, where it stopped and looked at me. The third shot impacted below the right eye and exited the back of the skull through a hole the size of a pencil. There was no blood on the ground between the site of the first shot and the last. I stopped using that bullet. Changed to the 100 gr. Sierra, and the next deer I shot spun and fell with similar shot placement. I don't think it's rear hooves moved more than 6".

Old70

Many things influence bullet performance besides velocity. Within the past week, I killed two unusually large hogs at ranges of 165 and 155 yards using a 24"-inch-barreled Contender in 6.5x30-30 AI using 123 grain Hornady SSTs at app. 2600 fps MV.

Both were quick, clean kills, but the recovered projectiles look nothing alike. One is nothing but a jacket; the other is closer to the textbook mushroom. Did one fail? No way. It's certainly not a textbook mushroom but about what I expected due to the size of the hog, the structure of the bullet, the impact velocity and the hard impact (shoulder) before encountering soft tissue. The hog died in its tracks, the bullet plowing through the onside shoulder and then carrying forward to damage the heart and a portion of the lungs before lodging in the meat on the inner portion of the off-side shoulder. It weighed 28.1 grains, retaining none of the core (just some smeared lead on the interior of the jacket).

The second boar was taken with a tight, behind-the-shoulder impact as the boar's front leg was forward (ribs only bones hit), and the bullet was recovered under the hide on the far side after thoroughly wrecking the lungs and again penetrating the ribcage. It weighed 72.3 grains and had a max diameter of .530".

The final appearance of the two bullets may be quite different, but the end-results were the same: dead hogs.

To me, the most important thing in developing a load is using a bullet that works well well inside of your maximum/minimum velocity window. Another thing that years of studying wound channels has taught me is that judging a bullet on the basis of a single incident is far from wise as no two situations/impacts are alike.

Nice report Bobby

Yes.

What killed the animals in both instances was that the bullet penetrated to the vitals and expanded to tear up vital tissue,so in that sense both did their job.

But I came to regard such bullet performance as undesirable because it was inconsistent depending on what it hit,and how fast it was going. At those velocities it may have work fine but at higher velocity or closer impact the jacket might shed the core in heavy resistance and fail to make it into the vitals.

Also IME animals hit so that vital tissues are destroyed and heavy bones are broken just tend to make fewer tracks.

I like core and jackets to hang together, or the bullet to have some mechanism for locking some portion of them together, for any game from large deer on up.The bigger the game, the more important this becomes IMHO.


This is more satisfactory to my way of thinking. 270-130 NPT. Game was a very large bull elk.

Hey Bob, I didn't know you liked bullets that

"shed their cores" ! !



Jerry

ps - JUST IN CASE some don't know-- there is PARTITION in front of the rear core.

Are you saying that you dont like a bullet that penetrates two inches and then EXPLODES.

dave

BobinNH-

No arguments from me on your bullet choices. I simply posted to show that there are more factors to consider than just velocity. I guess I'll have to break it into multiple posts because I think the forum only allows 6 pics per entry, but here are a few bullets I've recovered over the years. And, for me, since Contenders cartridges with modest velocities are about all I shoot, standard bullets work just fine and often perform similarly to the premiums. In fact, some of the recovered Ballistic Tips look quite similar to the recovered Accubonds.

[img]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v643/BobbyTomek/300yardrecovery-06-08-PB.jpg[/img]

And the last one: a discontinued Sierra 130 grain 7mm SSP taken from a buck killed at 108 yards using a 7mm Bullberry. Entered front of chest and penetrated to the hip. MV, if memory serves, was 2505 fps.

[quote=Mule Deer

Bullet rotation has an effect as well. That's slower at reduced muzzle velocities, but again, at ranges out to 200 yards (where 90% of big game is taken) a muzzle velocity 100-200 fps slower isn't going to have any meaningful effect. [/quote]


John, how can that be true ? All the 458 Lott fans swear it changes a bullet that almost bounces off of animals into a cannon.

That's been my experience also. The only factory ammo that always matches the box is Weatherby ammo in Weatherby rifles.

Ringman, that may be true today but it wasn't always so. It wasn't long ago that the quickest way to loose your Weatherby friends was to allow them to shoot over your chronograph.

Phil,

I always loved Finn's comments about what he "discovered" about the .458 Winchester after he moved to the U.S....

Me too and, as usual, he was right. A 500 gr bullet going 2000 fps does tend to make a big bloody hole through anything it hits.

I've killed a lot of deer. I've never had one go back to feeding after putting a bullet in it.

Not saying it couldn't happen but it defies my reality.




P

I sure had a cow elk at least look like it went back to feeding after it was hit by a Nosler 7mm Partition 160 started at 3,150 per second. It was the first animal I ever ranged. It ranged at exactly 400 yards. All the arteries attached at the top of the heart were destroyed.

Bobby I did not mean to make you work so hard....great thread and posts by you.

I was merely commenting on the bullet and not anything you had to say or observed.

I watched my nephew shoot a little mulie buck on opening day. 7mm-08, 140 VLD, my handloads, 2922 MV, 275 yards. Shot him broadside behind the shoulder. The buck kicked his hind legs and started trotting off, as if not hit. Not the desperation death run, but the "I need to leave now" trot. I thought my nephew hit him because of the kick, but started to doubt when he didn't go down. The buck actually ran parallel to us, getting closer. He stopped at around 150 yards away and hung his head. I thought gut shot. My nephew hit him again and the buck spun to face us, then staggered backwards and fell over.
Both bullets were chest shots, through and through. I wasn't impressed.




P

Pharm - don't discount the 7-08 OR the bullet. Sometimes for UNKNOWN reasons deer have a tenacity and will to live that defies explanation.

BTW - I'm not impress by VLDs either.


Jerry

I would never discount the Mighty -08, it's my cartridge of choice. I killed a buck with one this year at 541 yards. Last year's bull was 346 yards. I use Partitions.




P

Pharmseller where did you hit him and how far did he go?

I hit the buck through the lungs. Broke the right scapula going in, powdered the shoulder knuckle on the way out, exited. He went about 3 feet. Bullet velocity according to the ballistics program was 1926 fps.






P

When i was a teenager my brothers and father and I semi-professionally shot kangaroos on wheat crops. As we weren't shooting them for the chillers, we used all manner of calibres and bullets. Yes they were pretty much all cup and cores.

The difference in reactions to similar hits was incredible, even with the same load, range etc. We mostly shot the shoulders, which aren't all that tough even on the biggest roos.

One large roo shot with a 100g Interlock from a 243 would be blown to bits with an exit wound bigger than a grapefruit. The next, the roo would literally go back to feeding (apologies to Don) or hop nonchalantly away.

None of this makes me an expert, but we would shoot thousands in a year. We used whatever we felt like using from 22 lever actions to 30 cal magnums. We also accounted for hundreds of pigs per year in much the same manner and I noticed much the same inconsistent performance at times.

The one thing I would definitely say i did learn, was that using softer bullets generally made for quicker put downs, setting aside the odd aforementioned abberation in performance. I still hold to this today and that's why i favour the likes of Interlocks, Gamekings, Hotcors and such over those hard monos and so on.


I don't think there's much point in thought-experimenting bullet "failure" to the n-th degree. Sometimes crap happens.

Interesting.

That about squares with what I've seen from Partitions at the 500+- yard mark. Hit right they make few tracks.

If you make a good shot into the heart-lung area, it doesn't matter which bullet you are using. Same thing goes for a bad shot. Just my opinion.

hanco: that's a pretty broad brush. Perhaps you should add: "within reason"' or "within reasonable limits". Otherwise one could conclude that a 22 short is all that is needed for any hunting situation.

I agree with Hanco to a large extent re the bad shots. A pig gut shot with a 458 Win will usually run just as far as one hit in the same spot with a 222 Rem.

never shot a pig with either a 458 or a 222, but would not be surprised if you are correct. A gut shot hog can go a long ways!

http://rs53.pbsrc.com/albums/g61/BlueRIO7/DSCF0228_zpsqo1bplaf.jpg~c100

http://rs53.pbsrc.com/albums/g61/BlueRIO7/DSCF0232_zps9okq6dar.jpg~c100

500 gr. Hornady, round nose soft, 94 yrds 450 Howell

Gemsbok, live weight 547#

yesterday. Rio7

Bet the blood trail was short.

Folded up like a wet rag. Rio7

Man that's a hole!

Anyone who thinks frontal area doesn't matter is full of prune juice.

Frontal area matters to varying degree depending on the game- circumstance.
Keep in mind that when hunting much much larger game and things go wrong,
both amateurs and professionals may willingly sacrifice frontal area for penetration by opting for solids-
to urgently finish the task that softs failed to do.

Diametric wound channel volume is not the only thing to consider, just as important can be how WCV
is distribute through the animal. A solid that makes a narrower but longer channel can prove to be more
effective simply by the fact it was able to reach and destroy critical anatomy that a soft would not reach.

Starman, You make a good point,but If you shoot-em on this side and it blows a big hole on the way out the other side what is a solid going to do better??? Rio7

Bobby T, you take hella good photographs!

07,
I used a solid only as an example, of course it also applies to softs that are better penetrators than
other softs. I just find that better penetration even at the cost of some reduced frontal area offers
me more potential shot options. Thats why I miss the old FailSafe.
I recall a person that instantly dropped a charging asian buff with .300magnum 180FS shattering its spine
and one who brained an elephant with .300 magnum 160gn mono metal soft, that exited the back of the skull.
- Just goes to show the true capability & potential versatility of some modern era high performance softs.

I've shot a few fallow - probably about the size of your slightly smaller whitetails.

I generally only use cup and cores out of non magnums. Weird things can happen.

sierra 85gr bthp - shot fallow at 75yards, perfect shot from good rest on deer craning it's neck to eat from high branch. Buck ran into wood. I left it an hour an 15minutes to try for another. When I followed up it was laid down at the base of a tree and got up as I approached. I examined the couch area and saw droplets of blood where the head had been. Left it and came back the next morning - dead with through and through lung shot. Bullet had entered between ribs and exited between ribs, some expansion in lungs but main factor was the skin had been stretched as it fed. When the bullet had exited the skin had returned to the normal position and sealed the holes so the lungs hadn't collapsed.

And that has been my main finding - bullets not hitting rib bones can expand less - they have a tough balance to manage from 25yard shots to the shoulder up to chest shots at 250yards with nothing solid hit.

150gr sierra prohunters out of my 18" M700 Ti which didn't like anything approaching max loads killed somewhat slowly - a change to BTs cured that.

A 125gr sierra pro hunter out of the same rifle appeared to be a clean miss at 200yards on a little roebuck. It walked into the wood and maybe just wobbled a tiny bit as it did so. I waited 20minutes followed up, saw it standing and shot it through the neck. Perfect double lung - no expansion at all. Start load, a BC like a brick and double the distance the load was intended for

At normal velocities/situtaions I've found the same bullets to work really well.

Fast scan of this thread...

two observations...

1. Buy a chronograph...

2. Everyone seems to be a velocity freak...

Even if your bullet is 200 fps slower than you had hoped... do you suddenly think it is ineffective?

for a loss of 200 fps than expected, check a trajectory chart to adjust your zero... how much does it tell ya to adjust your elevation? Two Clicks?

if you need faster velocity out of your 308, buy an 06... if you need faster velocity still, buy a 300 Mag...

guess I am too much old school...

pick a bullet that is up to the job...
and rely on shot placement....

if shot placement is a problem, try practicing at the range more... or get a set up that kicks less, and live with less velocity...

90% of all game is taken at 100 yds or less
95% is taken at 200 yds or less....

so how much time and effort does one have to spend so they can brag about being in that last 5% that take game beyond 200 yds?

If you need to be in that 5% group... then spend more time shooting and practicing at the range...or shooting at varmints in the off season...

More velocity and premium bullets isn't the answer to your problem....look in the mirror and you'll see what needs to be improved upon...

By arguing that a loss of 200 fps is meaningless, one can argue one's self down from a .300 Win Mag to a .32-20 for all North American big game, 200 fps at a time.

There are innumerable variables in field shooting at live game not present when firing at inanimate objects on a range. Quality bullets, flatter trajectories, and larger diameter calibers help mitigate these variables to help with a clean kill.

99% of all statistics cited on the internet are made up on the spot.

Make that 99.1%.....

I am liking these Bitterroots, at least out of my 7mm Mashburn, they produced my fastest pure rib/lung shot kill on an elk. Was cool to see her bounce.









They clocked right at 3020 from rifle. Shot was only 145 yards but it was pretty cool to catch this one. Pretty good sized cow as well.

I like the way you think.

I've found a slightly more prosaic way of looking at it, and that is equating velocity and distance. If you theoretically knock 200 fps off the round, it is roughly the same as shooting the same animal at a greater distance. Take 200 fps off a 308 WIN round and it's about the same as shooting the animal at 75 yards greater range. Take a 300 Win Mag and knock 200 fps , and it's about 100 yards difference.

You can also equate two different chamberings. Given the same bullet, a 180 grainer, a 30-06 has about the same at the muzzle as a 300 Win Mag at 100 yards. At the muzzle, a 30-30 with a 170 grain bullet has about the same velocity as a 300 Win Mag at (let me take off my socks. . .) between 300 to 400 yards.

Yes that's all true but doesn't account for the higher rotational velocity of the magnum chambering, which helps bullet expansion and does not decline as fast as forward velocity....the reason magnum chamberings help those bullets expand better at distance.

Yep, rotation hardly slows at all, even at longer ranges, and has a definite effect on bullet expansion. Which is exactly why reducing muzzle velocity when testing bullets in "media" at close range doesn't mimic performance at long range, as so many people believe.

Agreed John.

I tell people that and the break out "energy figures" and tell me I'm some kind of dangerous nut....

Indeed. Increased velocity not only helps with a flatter trajectory, but increased delivered energy, and also less time to target, reducing wind drift.

I have no doubt that more whitetail deer in North America have been taken by the .30-30 than any other cartridge, perhaps more than the next two or three cartridges combined. Out to 150 or so yards, it's an effective, if not terribly flat shooting killer.

The same can be said of a .300 Win Mag at 400-500 yards.

Ah! Yes, it is true that I'd rather be attacked with an ice pick than a power drill. However, I still think the idea has some merit. Rotational energy is great as long as you have expansion already started. However, if the bullet is not expanding, it may pencil on through no matter how fast it is rotating. N'est pas? I'm asking, not stating this as fact.

I also don't see a huge difference between deer shot with 300 Mags vs. 30-06 inside 200 yards. Small hole in/Larger hole out at least when hit in the boiler room. However, let that 300 Win Mag hit a sizeable chunk of bone? I saw a big buck at the processor a while back that got hit in the spine with 300 Win Mag. The deer was basically cut in half, save a flap of belly skin.

Right, which is why flat-nosed bullets designed for lever action rifles are softer than spitzers, so that they won't pencil through at lower impact velocities.

And yes, so long as the bullet is an appropriate cup/core or partition type, there isn't much difference on game when shot at under 200 yards between a .300 WM, .30-06, and .308 Win for that matter, everything else being equal. Get much past 200 yards though, and the differences are evinced.

With the monolithics that are so in vogue now, velocity is much more critical for expansion. From my observations over the past decade or so of posts on this and other hunting boards, I think a lot of hunters are wasting money and actually diminishing their chances of a clean kill by using TSX and similar bullets on deer-sized game, particularly in calibers under .308".

That being said, my favorite coyote bullet is a 90 grain old school X bullet out of my .243 Win. It pencils through without tearing up the pelt, yet still drops them in their tracks.

Many deep thoughts in this topic.

This net is such an improvement over the old print system.

Bullet rotation and subsequent expansion have nothing to do with why people think you're a dangerous nut.




P

Hey ! You got an AMEN !! here. I've butted my head against that rock round here. As you mentioned the principle the 7-08 is just as good as the 280 and the 280 is just as good as the 7 Mag. ET.AL. etc. ( 300 Savage ----- 300 WM)

Time of flight is totally lost on some even tho wind drift gets its mention.

Jerry

You would know that how?

Relax, I'm just funnin' ya.

But consider your response: you're conceding that I know, you're just wondering how I came about the information.




P